Oil, the economy and the other side of the coin

[jbark]

I thought this might be of interest to some and while I am very hesitant to endorse fracking, this article provides another perspective on the much criticised recent moves of President Obama to open up more and more land and sea to oil prospectors, most notably in Alaska and the Gulf of New Mexico. There are always two sides to a story, and I think the long term goal (now more realisable than ever) of moving away from importing oil and welling and producing it their backyard will go a long way to changing the thrust of American foreign policy and the balance of both the US and the world economy. There is, of course, a price to pay. Is it too high? Do the means justify the end in this case? Will this, in the medium to long term, balance out on the side of overall good, for the Americans, for the world and for the planet?

I know this is a potentially volatile subject, so please bear this in mind and respond or comment critically, but with courtesy and respect to others, as I am sure their will be a wide array of opinions on this matter if the article is read (and particularly if it isn't , so please read it if you wish to contribute.)

I am very interested in learning more about this and having my views challenged, so any well thought out (and preferentially researched) opinions will be much appreciated!

NY TIMES ARTICLE

 

[jbark]

Too contentious for even the NEXUS? :shock:

Or maybe not interesting to anyone...

Well, thanks to those who visited, and this is a bump in case anyone missed it - I am still interested in any ideas or opinions if there are any out there!

cheers,

JBArk

And at the very least, have a GREAT day!

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Fracking has never been done safely...imo, because it is an inherently unsafe and destructive process. It poisons the water, pollutes the air and destroys the land. Increasingly, people are dying and becoming terminally ill as a result of the fracking industry.

Industrial civilization is not sustainable. Whether powered by oil or gas or 'green' energy, industrial civilization is, by definition, a dead end. It is not worth sacrificing the future of this planet and the life it sustains just so that we can have a few more years where a more trinkets can be produced for consumption by the privileged few at the top of the pyramid.

Wars are being fought for resources, sure...but they're also being fought to ensure the military industrial complex continues to be a veritable cash cow for those who suckle at its teats. As such, I doubt that, in the incredibly unlikely situation that it was possible to achieve energy independence for the "foreseeable future", American imperial aggression would abate. The only thing that would happen, imo, is the logic would change...but with the global threat of "terrorism", the flimsiest of the eternal pretexts is always a mere explosion (or foiled plot) away.